Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
Caselaw
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELCOtherMLD ELCLC NO. E005/25

Swaleh v Abdulrahim & another (Environment and Land Case 26 of 2025) [2026] KEELC 3178 (KLR)

Environment and Land Court
19 May 2026
MNMwangi Njoroge
267 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~1 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
This short ruling of the Environment and Land Court at Malindi deals solely with the question of costs following the plaintiff's withdrawal of the suit. When the matter came up for mention on 3 February 2026, counsel for the plaintiff, Mr. Magolo, informed the court that his client had instructed him to withdraw the suit, and it was accordingly marked as withdrawn. The parties could not agree on whether costs should be paid, and the issue was left to the court. The court, per Mwangi Njoroge J, noted that under section 27 of the Civil Procedure Act costs follow the event save where the court orders otherwise. It found that the suit was withdrawn before a defence could be filed, and that the work done by the defendants was minimal - only a replying affidavit filed in response to a motion dated 16 January 2026. The court also commended the plaintiff's decision to withdraw at an early stage rather than drag all parties and the court through full litigation, describing it as consistent with the current dispensation encouraging alternative dispute resolution. Exercising its discretion, the court ordered that each party bear its own costs of the suit. The judgment was dated, signed and delivered at Malindi via electronic mail on 19 May 2026. No substantive claims were determined, and no other relief was granted or refused.

Questions the Court framed

#

The issues the Court set itself to decide, in its own words.

  1. 1.Whether costs should be paid by any party following the plaintiff's withdrawal of the suit before a defence was filed

Key legal issues

#
01

Award of costs upon early withdrawal of a suit

Holding

The court exercised its discretion under section 27 of the Civil Procedure Act to order each party to bear its own costs, given the early withdrawal and minimal work done by the defendants.

Reasoning

The plaintiff withdrew the suit before a defence was filed; the defendants' only work was a replying affidavit to a motion. The court commended the early withdrawal as consistent with the encouragement of alternative dispute resolution and held it appropriate for parties to part amicably, including on costs.

p. 2

Legal principles established

#
  • Costs follow the event unless the court orders otherwise, and a court may order each party to bear its own costs where a suit is withdrawn at an early stage.

Court orders

#
  1. 1.Each party shall bear their own costs of the suit

The bench

#

One judgment of the whole court — no separate or dissenting opinions.

MN
majority

Wrote the judgment

Jurisdiction invoked
Section 27 of the Civil Procedure Act (costs follow the event unless the court orders otherwise)

Relief refused

#

Costs payable by the plaintiff to the defendants on withdrawal

The suit was withdrawn at an early stage before a defence was filed; the defendants' work was minimal, only a replying affidavit having been filed.

p. 2

Costs

Each party shall bear their own costs of the suit.

Quotable passages

#

Verbatim from the judgment, each located to the page it appears on in the official PDF — so these can be cited and checked directly.

Section 27 of the Civil Procedure Act states that all costs shall follow the event save where the court orders otherwise.
p. 1Statutory basis of costs
I find that the matter was withdrawn before a defence could be filed. The work on the suit by all the defendants was minimal; only a replying affidavit was filed to the motion dated 16/1/2026.
p. 2Findings on extent of work done
Consequently, I order that each party shall bear their own costs of the suit.
p. 2Final orders - costs
It would be good for all parties to part amicably on all fronts, including on the issue of costs when a case is withdrawn at such an early stage.
p. 1Amicable resolution on withdrawal

Issues in the judgment

#
minor

The judgment does not state the names of the parties or the nature of the suit; the file reference suggests a Malindi ELC case number but party names are absent from the extract.

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Swaleh v Abdulrahim & another (Environment and Land Case 26 of 2025) [2026] KEELC 3178 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2026). MLD ELCLC NO. E005/25. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2026/3178/eng@2026-05-19

Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.